Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

Wednesday, December 19, 2012

Sandy Hook

It is difficult to bring up the idea of gun control without being
labeled as “reactionist” given the recent Sandy Hook Tragedy; and there is
merit to that label. However, I feel that it would be a far worse fate to
ignore what we are faced with and use naivety and ignorance as a shield. Gun
ownership is a constitutional right and as such any steps to alter or limit it
must be approached with the utmost scrutiny. Personally I resent the fact that
society wishes to portray any opinions on this issue into outlier groups of
either “ban all guns” or “law-abiding citizens have the right to own any weapon
the military does” I will admit that I find myself trapped between these two
extremes so I decided to do some research.

The first item on the list was assault weapons. This is a
widely misunderstood classification that some would use to encompass any
semi-automatic firearm. This is much too broad. For my purposes, I apply the
“assault” designation to AR-15 type rifles primarily developed for military
applications and/or firearms utilizing magazine capacities in excess of 30 rounds (most
handguns are about half that). My decision to do this is based on their growing
role in spree killings and the likelihood of their use to mitigate said spree
killings.

In the past year alone these weapons have played a prominent
role in the random killings in Colorado, Oregon, and now Connecticut. I can
only assume that they were chosen for their ability to deliver maximum casualties
with minimal reloading. While these attributes are invaluable in combat
environments, they should not be readily accessible to the general public.

Many reading this will immediately throw up their hands in
exasperation and reply that blaming guns for murder is like blaming McDonalds
for obesity. As insightful and constructive as it is to compare
weight-management to the slaughter of children, this is an unsustainable and
insulting metaphor. The primary purpose of a firearm is to inflict damage on
something that had parents, the primary purpose of a mass produced cheeseburger
is to generate profit through the delivery of empty calories.

Let me re-iterate that I am not in-favor of banning handguns,
hunting rifles, or shotguns. Quite the contrary, I believe removing assault
rifles from the equation will create an even playing field for the law-abiding
citizen while retaining the intent of the second amendment. After all, how many
licensed gun-owners are going to be toting a Bushmaster .223 when they swing by
Bed, Bath, and Beyond or catch the 9:30 showing of The Hobbit? As it stands we are asking brave members of the general
populace to intervene in a situation where they are increasingly out-gunned.

The first counter-argument to this is, “We did this assault
weapons ban thing already and results, if there even were any, were
negligible.” There is value in this observation, but the 1994 ban was largely
symbolic due to a gaping loophole that allowed for the resale and ownership of
assault weapons and high capacity magazines manufactured before the ban took
effect. This meant that the 1.5 Million “banned” weapons and 24 million
“banned” high-capacity magazines already in private circulation could still be
easily acquired and legally owned until manufacturing resumed in 2004.

The second counter-argument is, “Crazy people will kill
innocent people one way or another. Criminals don’t obey laws.” Again, this
should not be easily dismissed and there is plenty of empirical evidence to
substantiate this viewpoint. However, we do have the ability to limit the tools
with which an unstable person can express their anger. In the three cases I
referenced above the assault weapons were either legally-acquired by the
perpetrator or stolen from an acquaintance who had legally acquired them. The shooters
used what they used because they had access to it. I truly believe that had
these individuals been given access to a nuclear weapon or a missile battery
they would have been just as likely to use them and most reasonable people can
agree that private citizens do not have the right to own or brandish these
weapons.

Firearms are not the source of human
violence, they are simply the most effective apparatus widely available to
violent humans at this point in history. It is also somewhat misleading to
compare America to European countries with tighter gun restrictions because it
glosses over a far more complex set of underlying factors. For example, Great
Britain averages .25 gun deaths per 100,000 residents while the United States
averages 9.2. Because the UK has some of the most restrictive gun legislation
one might be quick to create a simple correlation and believe suffocating gun
laws will fix the issue.

The truth is that gun violence in the UK continues to decline
even as gun ownership rates rise and disregarding legislation, they have always
had lower gun violence rates per capita (and it isn’t even close when it comes
to spree killings.) In fact, the United States has hosted 61% of the world’s
deadliest mass shootings of the past 50 years and our closest competitor is
Finland. The cause is rooted much deeper than gun laws, but while we continue
to endlessly bicker over slippery-slopes and our ability to effectively
participate in a theoretical insurrection, actual innocent people are dying.

After a lengthy discussion with friends, I realized that I might even be willing to heavily regulate, register, and tax all assault
weapons thereby placing them in a different class than a deer rifle or a
handgun, but what I am unwilling to do is dismiss any course of action that can
reasonably be expected to save the lives of children or the teachers and
administrators that protect them.

The second item on this list was school security. Some in
Texas have called for licensed teachers and school administrators to carry
handguns while at school. I have some concerns about this as well. Since 84% of
all public school teachers are female that means there is a high likelihood that
these firearms will not be carried on their person (purses, drawers, etc..) and
being married to a public school teacher I know that it can be difficult to
supervise 23 children at once so there is a possibility of a student getting
their hands on one and hurting themselves or someone else. This would inevitably
lead to a lawsuit against the teacher for contributing to the death of a child
through negligence.

The only case I could uncover of an armed
school official intervening in a spree killing was the 1997 case of Luke
Woodham who stabbed his mother to death with a knife before taking a .30-.30
with him to his Pearl, Mississippi high school and shooting 9 classmates
(killing 2). The vice-principal retrieved his handgun from his truck and
confronted Woodham after Woodham had gotten back into his car to leave the
scene.

I have often wondered why these public school shootings tend
to take place in small rural or suburban communities. Newton (30,000 people) Bart
Township, PA (3,000 people) Columbine, CO (25,000) Chardon, OH (5,000 people) were
all sites of recent school shootings with multiple deaths. Why aren’t these occurring
as often in inner-city schools located in areas with much higher overall crime
rates? Is it greater security at the school? Police presence? Have they armed
the tenured staff?

The truth is that, for whatever reason, more and more
Americans are choosing random killings as a manifestation of their anger.Some believe the list of culprits encompasses
everything from violent video games to media coverage to the deterioration of
the nuclear family. There is probably some legitimate culpability to be found
in all of these, but not all the blame rests with any one of these. We are
broken people reaping the harvest of a broken world, but when it becomes
overwhelming I remember this quote:

“In this
world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world."

For those who wish to discuss the “This is what we get for
keeping God out of public schools” nonsense or other religious aspects of the
tragedy, I suggest you read Rachel Held Evan’s insights here.